Wallabies 2019 Thread

[KOB1987]

Ok so let me get this straight, we picked a fast winger (strike) and a more balanced winger (read: slower, maybe has played fullback, has better ball-skills etc) even when we have the option of another "strike" winger?

Who else is using this tactic? NZ aren't, England certainly aren't (May, Cokanasiga) Ireland no (Stockdale, Conway) South African absolutely do not?

Is it a myth?

Or is it actually a pattern?

Or is it just us picking Reece Hodge on the wing?

What are the strategic advantages of this non-strike winger?

One of these skills is that they might also be a good defender. Not endorsing Hodge, but he actually ain't that slow, he just runs awkwardly. If we were to pick a second specialist winger it would have to be either Speight or Naivalu, a non-injured Petaia could also get the gig by the end of the RWC even though he isn't a specialist winger. You wouldn't have any issues with that I assume? Hodge was picked there for the first Bledisloe and like the rest of the players was reselected for the second one on the back of that performance. And was far from worst on field, Lilo got that honour.

 

[KOB1987]

That fine, and more accurately defines the landscape, but lets not paint a pig in makeup here.

We are essentially picking Hodge because we feel he is 'too good not to be in the side.' But we are not using him in anyway that makes use of his 'non-traditional' wing skillset, ie to come into first receiver, defend in the centres or some other machination. He sits on his wing, kicks for touch, and tries to finish backline movements.

In my opinion there is no strike winger or non-strike winger, we are either making this term to make up for the skill shortfall that say a Naivalu/Daugunu/Pulu has (kicking, tackling, passing whatever) or we are trying to justify picking players out of position Hodge/DHP - but we are not picking them because of their non-ability to "strike".

I think Petaia will takes Hodge's position if fit, and then we will do away with our "one-strike" winger strategy and low and behold have two wingers who like "striking", or in other words are adept at playing wing.

He might but we won't because he's actually a centre.

 

[Derpus]

Hodge isnt that slow in full flight. He has the acceleration and turning circle of a fully laden cargo ship.

 

[Bobby Sands]

One of these skills is that they might also be a good defender. Not endorsing Hodge, but he actually ain't that slow, he just runs awkwardly. If we were to pick a second specialist winger it would have to be either Speight or Naivalu, a non-injured Petaia could also get the gig by the end of the RWC even though he isn't a specialist winger. You wouldn't have any issues with that I assume? Hodge was picked there for the first Bledisloe and like the rest of the players was reselected for the second one on the back of that performance.

What is the definition of a good defender as a winger?

Is it that they are a better defender in the centres (ie are they are better technical hitter/tackler)? I would argue that the skills needed for defence on the wing are rarely front on shots, it is about knowing when to come in and when to hold your width, its about using the sideline as the 16th defender (all well drilled teams have 17 defenders).

I would argue that a good defender at 13 does not necessarily make a good defender at 14. Which is why wing is a specialist position on both sides of the ball.

 

[Bobby Sands]

He might but we won't because he's actually a centre.

Hes played a lot more football for QLD at wing than centre, and he played his final year at school at fullback - so I'm not sure that holds water, but sure you think hes in the squad as the third 13 behind JOC (James O'Connor) and Kurindrani?

 

[KOB1987]

Hes played a lot more football for QLD at wing than centre, and he played his final year at school at fullback - so I'm not sure that holds water, but sure you think hes in the squad as the third 13 behind JOC (James O'Connor) and Kurindrani?

No he's in there as Koroibete's back up it seems. If he's deemed unfit I think we will see this proven by his replacement being Speight or Naivalu. So you're agreeing that is isn't actually a winger? He's a fullback/centre/winger - that's what I'm getting at.

 

[Strewthcobber]

What is the definition of a good defender as a winger?

Is it that they are a better defender in the centres (ie are they are better technical hitter/tackler)? I would argue that the skills needed for defence on the wing are rarely front on shots, it is about knowing when to come in and when to hold your width, its about using the sideline as the 16th defender (all well drilled teams have 17 defenders).

I would argue that a good defender at 13 does not necessarily make a good defender at 14. Which is why wing is a specialist position on both sides of the ball.

I've seen it argued that the way teams defend these days, with 13 players in the front line, including the open winger, they are defending more like the outside centre used to (with the fullback covering the wing up or back)

So maybe that explains why we're seeing centres out there

 

[Bobby Sands]

No he's in there as Koroibete's back up it seems. If he's deemed unfit I think we will see this proven by his replacement being Speight or Naivalu. So you're agreeing that is isn't actually a winger? He's a fullback/centre/winger - that's what I'm getting at.

I think he is the second best winger in Australia currently. Regardless of what other position he can play.

He will very soon be the best winger and 13 in the country.

Haven't seen him at 15 at professional level yet.

 

[Bobby Sands]

I've seen it argued that the way teams defend these days, with 13 players in the front line, including the open winger, they are defending more like the outside centre used to (with the fullback covering the wing up or back)

So maybe that explains why we're seeing centres out there

But are we seeing centres out there other than Hodge?

I can't think of one other example?

 

[KOB1987]

What is the definition of a good defender as a winger?

Is it that they are a better defender in the centres (ie are they are better technical hitter/tackler)? I would argue that the skills needed for defence on the wing are rarely front on shots, it is about knowing when to come in and when to hold your width, its about using the sideline as the 16th defender (all well drilled teams have 17 defenders).

I would argue that a good defender at 13 does not necessarily make a good defender at 14. Which is why wing is a specialist position on both sides of the ball.

I don't disagree with this. It's probably more about not having a winger with defensive deficiencies on both flanks, so there's going to be some compromise with doing this, a lot more in our case.

 

[Strewthcobber]

But are we seeing centres out there other than Hodge?

I can't think of one other example?

In this squad, Hodge, Petaia, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), JOC (James O'Connor), Beale must all be some chance of playing wing.

I'd certainly prefer all of them defending there ahead of say, DHP

 

[Bobby Sands]

I don't disagree with this. It's probably more about not having a winger with defensive deficiencies on both flanks, so there's going to be some compromise with doing this, a lot more in our case.

My belief is that it is just an admission from Cheik that the specialist wingers in Australia all have a falldown in their game (Daugunu = defence, Naivalu = positioning and kicking game, Speight = speed? failure at the level in the past, Pulu = defence) which means that we are better served with a "solid" player on the wing who doesn't have this glaring deficiency but equally is not a genuine threat.

In summary, no coach in the world would not want two strike wingers if they have the cattle to do so.

 

[Bobby Sands]

In this squad, Hodge, Petaia, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), JOC (James O'Connor), Beale must all be some chance of playing wing.

I'd certainly prefer all of them defending there ahead of say, DHP

I meant, is any other country using this tactic other than us.

But yes, I understand your point.

 

[KOB1987]

My belief is that it is just an admission from Cheik that the specialist wingers in Australia all have a falldown in their game (Daugunu = defence, Naivalu = positioning and kicking game, Speight = speed? failure at the level in the past, Pulu = defence) which means that we are better served with a "solid" player on the wing who doesn't have this glaring deficiency but equally is not a genuine threat.

In summary, no coach in the world would not want two strike wingers if they are have the cattle to do so.

With the caveat that they don’t leak tries

 

[Joe Blow]

When did this idea of a "strike" winger become a thing? Why would a team not expect all wingers to have "strike?"

What does the other winger do if he isn't "striking (sic)?"

My understanding is that we are just retrofitting players who are not wingers to play wing and then justifying the selection.

Does NZ subscribe to this philosophy of not having too much strike? What happens if you you have too much strike? Do you score too many tries?

It happened when we inserted a bloke from AFL(formerly from league) at fullback who couldn’t kick a few years back. We can now revert back to two wingers with strike.

 

[Bobby Sands]

I think this idea actually comes from rugby league where you might have a defensive centre & a strike centre. This actually makes sense as the game is very front on, and the defensive centre will often be defending the opposite gun centre. Given the high defensive load and front on nature, it’s actually a strategic avenue.

Having defensive wingers makes very litter sense in either code as a primary function.
.

 

[KOB1987]

I think this idea actually comes from rugby league where you might have a defensive centre & a strike centre. This actually makes sense as the game is very front on, and the defensive centre will often be defending the opposite gun centre. Given the high defensive load and front on nature, it’s actually a strategic avenue.

Having defensive wingers makes very litter sense in either code as a primary function.
.

Kind of, but it’s more to do with the defensive structure than it is the actual defensive capabilities of the player. That’s a whole different argument but we like to drop one winger back with the fullback in defence. Joe Blow is kind of on the money, but it didn’t start with Folau, it became a necessity with him at 15 fullback though.

 

[Up the Guts]

I think this idea actually comes from rugby league where you might have a defensive centre & a strike centre. This actually makes sense as the game is very front on, and the defensive centre will often be defending the opposite gun centre. Given the high defensive load and front on nature, it’s actually a strategic avenue.

Having defensive wingers makes very litter sense in either code as a primary function.
.

Hmm. it’s an interesting one. With centres playing either on the right or left of the field in League it can be a bit of a nothing position at times (hence all the excitement when Trbojovic was playing as a roving centre/second fullback in Origin II this year). I personally think the death of the dual strike winger setup has come about since the high ball became more prevalent.

 

[Bobby Sands]

There is no death of dual wingers. Every country in the world uses them.

This notion of strike winger has been made up on this forum.

We just don’t have two Koriobetes.

 

[Derpus]

There is no death of dual wingers. Every country in the world uses them.

This notion of strike winger has been made up on this forum.

We just don’t have two Koriobetes.

Naivalu has always been good in gold.